Why We Love — and Love to Hate — Fads

By Mary Pilon

pigeonbeaks.com

Rapid success for a product might be a mixed blessing in the long run.

Whether it’s Pet Rocks or Crocs, there are patterns in the rapid adoption of fad items.

According to new research from Wharton marketing professor Jonah Berger and Gael Le Mens, an economics professor at the Universitat Pompeu Fabra in Barcelona, when a product becomes too popular too quickly, consumers abandon it almost as quickly as they once flocked to it. Being aware of that pattern may give you pause the next time you’re deciding on a must-have personal gadget or even picking a baby name.

The two looked at first name trends, specifically how the names Charlene, Tricia and Kristi rose and fell since 1900. (You can read all of their research as a PDF here.) They found that the more rapidly a name rose, the less likely it was to continue in popularity. For example, from 1910 to 1950 the name Charlene rose slowly, but it also took a long time to fade (from 1950 to 2000). By contrast, names like Tricia and Kristi spiked in the 1970s, then rapidly declined by the 1990s.

“People want to be unique,” Prof. Berger says.

The same tension holds true for things we buy. Just as you probably don’t want your child to be one of 20 Mileys in her kindergarten class, you also don’t want to be perceived as a person who latches onto fads. (You know, just another acid-wash clad, UGGs-wearingFurby fan watching the Hamster Dance.)

Prof. Berger cites trend data from Billboard music charts to make his case. The artists who broke into the top 100 with their first hit were less likely to stick around than bands who had a hit or two in the top 200. The latter group would end up selling more albums overall, he says. For names, there have been more Charlenes than Tricias in the U.S. in the last century, even though in the late 1960s and early 1970s, Tricia was more popular than Charlene.

There’s a sweet spot that most of us want to occupy — current and up-to-date, but not too far ahead or too far behind, and our consumer choices reflect that.

“People don’t want to be too edgy or behind the times. We don’t want to be the only person who doesn’t have a cell phone or what movies are coming. We don’t want to be fashion forward or fashion behind,” Prof. Berger says.

With certain products, like refrigerators or dish soap, we’ll buy anything because we don’t care what the brand says about us, he says. But in other domains, like haircuts, clothing or music, we care about the message a product conveys to others.

Sometimes, companies can hit a golden, but near-impossible to maintain sweet spot with consumers. New York magazine recently offered up yoga growing yoga-clothing chain Lululemon as an example. Now that the Lulu movement is a rapidly-rising trend, one wonders whether the growing awareness and omnipresence of $98 Groove yoga pants will change the way consumers feel about them. Starbucks once had hefty trend capital, but now is closing stores and reinventing itself after explosive growth.

But product don’t have to catch on slowly to be successful. Marketers and companies “want to ensure a continuous flow of adopters,” Prof. Berger says. This can mean continually improving on a product or proving that it is actually worth purchasing. One example of a good that become popular over the long-run: the iPod.

With one counter example, like Tickle Me Elmo toys, the problem wasn’t necessarily the product, but that everyone adopted it, and adopted it rapidly. This can also happen with careers, Mr. Berger says. (Remember how “E.R.” inspired careers in medicine?) But when it comes to ditching a trend, often consumers perceive a bubble and fear that it may burst.

These findings are consistent with Prof. Berger’s earlier research. In 2004, he found that college students at Stanford University were less likely to wear the popular yellow “Livestrong” wristbands when students who lived in the “geek dorm” sported them. When accountants start driving Harley Davidson motorcycles, the tough image of a hog dissolves. Original bikers may abandon, fearing being perceived as wannabes.

“The more you study these things,” Prof. Berger says, “the more difficult it is to consume anything at all.”

Comments (5 of 8)

http://www.religionandnature.com/beats/dr-dre-monster-beats-beats.html wrote :

Great work! That is the kind of info that should be shared across the internet. Disgrace on the seek engines for not positioning this publish higher! Come on over and discuss with my website . Thank you =)

6:50 am March 12, 2014

http://www.religionandnature.com/beats/dr-dre-beats-amazon.html wrote :

I used to be recommended this blog by means of my cousin. I am now not certain whether this submit is written through him as nobody else know such special approximately my problem. You are wonderful! Thanks!

12:13 am January 15, 2012

Esteban Ullery wrote :

I totally agree with your feelings.Many thanks for your sharing.

4:33 am August 6, 2011

ugg boots wrote :

I shorted CROX at $64 in the summer of ’07, covered for less than a dollar at the end of last year. uggcheap.us